Well fair enough. I think you missed my updated comments in my last post on the lack of prediction. As I said I generally concur with you on that although I dont know why you are singling out primaries especially. Its a more widespread issue than that isn't it?.

Looks like I have helped you run a coach and horses through the topic of the thread.

If anyone has any further comments on triplicities please come back in.

Mark_________________‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly

i wasn't just thinking of primary directions when i made that comment, but astrology in general having moved away from a predictive art to more of something else. it is funny to me, but astrologers have a profusion of predictive tools to work with but no one is making much in the way of predictions.. surely that must strike folks other then just me as odd.

to return to the topic of triplicities, I don't really think there existed a system where the triplicity cycle restarted. Instead, according to Hellenistic astrologers, in every human life the first lord of the triplicity of the ruling luminary hands over its time-rulership to the second lord while the third lord assists for both, as it's clearly written in Valens 2.1-2. (Note that each exposition of this system adds Mercury to the triplicity of Virgo: Dorotheus in Hephaestio 1.6.2 which is missing in Umar's version, the Michigan Astrological Papyrus 3B.6, whereas Valens 2.1.10 has no clear in his intent.)

The tripartite division of life (early, middle and late) is a late development, and it must be attributed to the Persians as an interpolation (which directly contradicts the beginning of the sentence) in Dorotheus 2.3.4 shows. (Otherwise Dorotheus always divides life in two parts.) The question when this handing over occurres is answered by Valens himself, who probably depending on Nechepsos and Petosiris uses ascensional times and planetary periods. He seems to be at great pains to expose their doctrine in a digestable way in 3.11 and in the most part of Book 7. Other astrologers apparently don't bother with this system with the exception of Dorotheus 1.22-23, which, as no Greek parallel is found, can also be a simplification of the description of Valens, interpolated here by Persian editors; even more, the third lord is theoretically (like in Firmicus, Paulus and the Liber Hermetis) or practically (as it can be seen in many example nativities, even in Dorotheus and Valens) omitted, or the whole triplicity lord system is tried to be rationalized (for different approaches see Ptolemy and the mutual source of Antiochus and Porphyry, the echoes of the latter may be found in a possibly 2nd century nativity, POxy. 4277). Therefore it is likely that the validity of this system was already challenged in the early centuries.

I dont think think that memorial is quite correct though in simply describing Alexander Marr as a siderealist.

Isaac Starkman worked extensively with Marr and made the following comment in an old thread:

Isaac wrote:

Quote:

In all his books and articles Alexander Marr never used the Sidereal Zodiac like Cyril Fagan or Brigadier Firebrance, the editor of Spica. Indeed, he took some of their techniques and applied them into the Tropical Zodiac, like Fagan's PSSR system.

I quote from the foreword of Marr's book Prediction I:

''The discoveries of the eminent astrologer Cyril Fagan split the astrological world into three main camps: Tropical, Sidereal, and what the late Brigadier Firebrance termed "Little Bastard Zodiac", where precession is expunged from charts whilst maintaining the tropical zodiac…I hope to persuade Siderealists that transits to the radix should be applied in the tropical manner, that is, disregarding precession. However, in regard to return charts, both Tropical and Sidereal Solar Returns are valid."

_________________‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly

Last edited by Mark on Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:06 pm; edited 1 time in total

James_M wrote:
i wasn't just thinking of primary directions when i made that comment, but astrology in general having moved away from a predictive art to more of something else. it is funny to me, but astrologers have a profusion of predictive tools to work with but no one is making much in the way of predictions.. surely that must strike folks other then just me as odd.

Hi James,

I do know a prominent psychological astrologer here in Scotland that teaches her students not to predict! Its a generalisation but I think traditionalists are probably less guilty of this accusation than modern astrologers. Horary for example is a very practical traditional technique totally focused on making predictions! I am sure a lot of natal astrologers are making predictions for their clients too. However, with the requirements of client confidentiality its not usually something astrologers are either willing or ethically able to share publicly.

Since I took over as mundane moderator two years ago I have repeatedly encouraged astrologers of all varieties to make mundane predictions rather than just analyse current events astrologically. There have been some interesting predictions. Perhaps most striking was Steven Birchfield's prediction of a Conservative-Liberal coalition in the last British general election. Regarding the Euro crisis there are some predictions on the mundane forum. Check out Lunlumo's posts in particular. I have made some predictions too. Not always successfully I might add! For example., I predicted the Australian Labour party would lose the last federal elections. I was wrong. While the they did lose their majority in parliament they still managed to cling on as a government with the help of 3 independents and a Green. I learned an instructive lesson from that election though regarding using ingress charts. Andrew Bevan has made some remarkable predictions on things like royal births and his record on Eurovision Song Contest has been quite brilliant. I intend to make a prediction on the forthcoming Scottish independence referendum. So I can assure you mundane prediction is not dead on Skyscript!

Mark_________________‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly

to return to the topic of triplicities, I don't really think there existed a system where the triplicity cycle restarted. Instead, according to Hellenistic astrologers, in every human life the first lord of the triplicity of the ruling luminary hands over its time-rulership to the second lord while the third lord assists for both, as it's clearly written in Valens 2.1-2. (Note that each exposition of this system adds Mercury to the triplicity of Virgo: Dorotheus in Hephaestio 1.6.2 which is missing in Umar's version, the Michigan Astrological Papyrus 3B.6, whereas Valens 2.1.10 has no clear in his intent.)

The tripartite division of life (early, middle and late) is a late development, and it must be attributed to the Persians as an interpolation (which directly contradicts the beginning of the sentence) in Dorotheus 2.3.4 shows. (Otherwise Dorotheus always divides life in two parts.) The question when this handing over occurres is answered by Valens himself, who probably depending on Nechepsos and Petosiris uses ascensional times and planetary periods. He seems to be at great pains to expose their doctrine in a digestable way in 3.11 and in the most part of Book 7. Other astrologers apparently don't bother with this system with the exception of Dorotheus 1.22-23, which, as no Greek parallel is found, can also be a simplification of the description of Valens, interpolated here by Persian editors; even more, the third lord is theoretically (like in Firmicus, Paulus and the Liber Hermetis) or practically (as it can be seen in many example nativities, even in Dorotheus and Valens) omitted, or the whole triplicity lord system is tried to be rationalized (for different approaches see Ptolemy and the mutual source of Antiochus and Porphyry, the echoes of the latter may be found in a possibly 2nd century nativity, POxy. 4277). Therefore it is likely that the validity of this system was already challenged in the early centuries.

Thank you very much Levente!

I had heard that the use of all three triplicity rulers for life periods was not applied by hellenistic authorities. Thank you for giving us chapter and verse on the whole topic. Could you say a little more about the use of Mercury as a triplicity ruler of Virgo please? Is this a special condition for Virgo because the planet is domicile and exaltation ruler? Where does this leave the general participating ruler in the Dorothean triplicity system? In terms of the source for this are you relying exclusively on Dorotheus as quoted by Hephaistio? As you point out Valens doesn't seem to explicitly support this.

Thanks

Mark_________________‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly

i find the terms modern and traditional have been used a bit too much to beat others over the head with using these terms.. a lot of polarization in the astrology community seems the result of those more interested in polarizing then community building and finding common ground.. it is another separate topic i suppose..

i think anyone who tries to make a prediction quickly recognizes how hard it is and only a fool would suggest they didn't get it wrong, especially starting out, but even with advanced proponents of astrology i see it is just as possible.. people keep there head down mostly and don't stick it out for fear it might get knocked off, lol.. probably this is the case with a full time professional type astrologer even more so.

i have read some of the threads in the mundane section and am familiar with some of those posters you mention. i will consider looking again. mundane seems to have fallen into dis-use.. horary on the other hand seems most popular and it is a predictive realm of astrology that i am least familiar with.. personally i find many of the questions i see asked in public forms really dumb ass questions which might be one reason why i haven't been drawn to horary.. that is a sweeping comment too - wink wink! others do it and seem to enjoy the process.. kudos to them.. thanks for the conversation..

Re: "I dont think think that memorial is quite correct though in simply describing Andrew Marr as a siderealist."

Yes, I totally agree...in no way would I consider him a siderealist. I think because of his championing of Cyril Fagan's techniques (though applied tropically) that there was a general misunderstanding. Anyone who read his books would have the correct conclusion in this.....his books, by the way, are highly recommended.

...and, once again, it's ALEXANDER MARR.

By the way, Marr also wrote concerning a study of various techniques from Morin, with extensive commentary. Interesting!

oops. Thanks. Guess I am more stressed out than I realised. I somehow got his name muddled in my head with a very well known BBC journalist. . I have updated earlier references with the correct first name.

Mark_________________‘’As thou conversest with the heavens, so instruct and inform thy minde according to the image of Divinity…’’ William Lilly

Back soon with an example of working with ascensional times using Madoff.

Using Bernie Madoff's chart, I use the degree of his latitude of birth which is 40°N, then using a Table of Ascensional Times I check the ascensional time of the sign Taurus at 40° latitude North (Madoff's 10th place by WSH) and come to 21°. So 21 becomes an age when career/status is highlighted; I also get 21 + 8 (Venus' minor period) and 21 + 25 (Moon's minor period) which are other ages when tenth house topics are highlighted in some way because the triplicity lords of the 10th WSH (Moon & Venus) are in the sign Taurus. The other triplicity ruler of the tenth, Mars, is in Gemini: the ascensional time of the sign Gemini at 40° latitude North is 28° which equals to 28 years old; you can also add Mars' minor period 15 + 28 = 43

So you have the following ages that are highlighted:

21 (Ascensional time of the sign Taurus)
28 (Ascensional time of the sign Gemini)
29 (Ascensional time of the sign Taurus + Venus' minor period)
43 (Ascensional time of the sign Gemini + Mars' minor period)
46 (Ascensional time of the sign Taurus + Moon's minor period)

Halves and thirds of these ages can also be used. For example 46 which is the ascensional time of the sign Taurus + Moon's minor period: 46 divided by 2 equals 23 and 46 divided by 3 equals 15.3 years.

Using the planets' minor years you can time the activation of certain aspects you have, the closest ones preferably. Example in Madoff's chart Moon and Sun are conjunct: Moon's minor period is 25 + Sun's minor period which is 19 = 44. The event(s) at that age affect the area(s) of life the planets occupy. Again halves and thirds of these ages can also be used.

Hello to all. I am a relatively new (9 months) student to astrology and this is my first post here, so hope that I'm not interrupting anything with a question. I have been very interested in learning, or at least trying to understand how some of these older predictive methods were used. I do have a question though. If we look at the table referenced above, we can see that, especially closer to the equator, the times are very similar. If we halve, or even divide by thirds, the times, then we get activation periods at roughly the same ages. I may not be articulating clearly, but in the case of Madoff above, this technique shows activation of his 10th at 21 eg. Well, the 10th does not only represent career and status. So, what of the years before 21? Or in between 29 and 43? It just seems like there is a piece missing. That there was such value placed on the triplicities, as well as their use, suggests to me that they must have worked, but that something has been lost in translation?

Could you say a little more about the use of Mercury as a triplicity ruler of Virgo please? Is this a special condition for Virgo because the planet is domicile and exaltation ruler? Where does this leave the general participating ruler in the Dorothean triplicity system? In terms of the source for this are you relying exclusively on Dorotheus as quoted by Hephaistio?

I think the best I can do with your questions to quote the only sources I know about this issue. The first is Dorotheus, quoted verbatim by Hephaestio (1.6.2, my translation):

Dorotheus of Sidon wrote:

The Bull, the Virgin and the Goat-Horned One is ruled by Aphrogenes (sc. Venus) at daytime and by heavenly Selene (sc. the Moon) at night, and next to them the third one is the god who is the lord of battles (sc. Mars) but now in the Virgin take the son of Maia (sc. Mercury) as a partner.

The second is the author of the Michigan astrological papyrus but the lines are rather fragmentary (3B.4-7):

An anonymous astrologer wrote:

On the Bull, the Virgin and the Goat-Horned One Selene, Aphrodite and Hermes [is told to have rulership but Ares also participates, nevertheless, this latter does not] act as a sub-procurator.

If we dismiss the possibility that the anonymous author of the papyrus treatise made a mistake with including Mercury among the rulers of the Taurus-Virgo-Capricorn triplicity, this doesn't seem to be an exclusive Dorothean invention. Reading Dorotheus I think he recommends us to use Mercury instead of Mars in the case of Virgo, and it sounds logical to me to include Mercury also in a triplicity belonging to the night sect as it has a double nature, but maybe later authors didn't really like this scheme and put it aside.

BTW I have an off question which has been on my mind for a time: why is the name Ἡφαιστίων preferred to be Anglicized "Hephaistio" in astrological circles and not Hephaestio or Hephaestion as the normal Latinitate way would be? I've got no problem with it, just I wonder; anyway, this fashion resulted in two separate Wikipedia articles about the same personality.

I haven't read all the posts in this topic, so I apologise in advance.

A master of Astrology has taught me that triplicity rulers indicate different layers of the same House, nicely neat in three distinct categories: matter, spirit and both of them. The first TR shows the material signification of the House, the second the spiritual signification of the same House and the third both material and spiritual (or in between).

For example, the first TR of the 9th House shows the travels in foreign countries, the contact with other cultures, the books and other material stuff pertained to this House, the second TR of the same House - dreams, profecies, psychic feelings, religion, faith, belief and other spiritual things related to that House... the third triplicity ruler of the 9th House belongs to Astrology, as it can see both material and spiritual worlds and is the mirror of the whole world._________________Amor ordinem nescit.
Love does not know order.
- Saint Jerome -

Contact Deborah Houlding
| terms and conditions
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated